Wednesday, November 11, 2015

We find that our democratic theories and forms of government were fashioned by but one of the many races and peoples which have come within their practical operation, and that that race, the so-called Anglo-Saxon, developed them out of its own insular experience unhampered by inroads of alien stock. When once thus established in England and further developed in America we find that other races and peoples, accustomed to despotism and even savagery, and wholly unused to self-government, have been thrust into the delicate fabric. Like a practical people as we pride ourselves, we have begun actually to despotize our institutions in order to control these dissident elements, though still optimistically holding that we retain the original democracy.

Of course, economist John R. Commons was far from the first to observe the obvious:

“Another cause of revolution is difference of races which do not at once acquire a common spirit; for a state is not the growth of a day, any more than it grows out of a multitude brought together by accident. Hence the reception of strangers in colonies, either at the time of their foundation or afterwards, has generally produced revolution; for example, the Achaeans who joined the Troezenians in the foundation of Sybaris, becoming later the more numerous, expelled them; hence the curse fell upon Sybaris. At Thurii the Sybarites quarrelled with their fellow-colonists; thinking that the land belonged to them, they wanted too much of it and were driven out. At Byzantium the new colonists were detected in a conspiracy, and were expelled by force of arms; the people of Antissa, who had received the Chian exiles, fought with them, and drove them out; and the Zancleans, after having received the Samians, were driven by them out of their own city. The citizens of Apollonia on the Euxine, after the introduction of a fresh body of colonists, had a revolution; the Syracusans, after the expulsion of their tyrants, having admitted strangers and mercenaries to the rights of citizenship, quarrelled and came to blows; the people of Amphipolis, having received Chalcidian colonists, were nearly all expelled by them.”

The result of not having listened to the warnings is that not only is the original Anglo-Saxon stock population displaced, so are all Whites. One symbolic example today's Veterans Day cartoon picture on Google's home page. It features seven people, and only two of them are White men: an elderly vet very far in the background, and a youngish USAF officer, also in the background, waving his hand like a goofball.

All forward positions and dignified faces belong to non-Whites and women.

Aristotle must have been very learned in history to have so many relevant examples at his fingertips. Even more impressive if his works were actually notes of his lectures taken by his students, as some believe. It would mean that he listed all those examples out loud from memory.

With my family, I've started making the comments that war is inevitable, and that immigration is invasion, etc. I never say I'm in support of violent retribution, or deportation, or anything, I just make the points as an "uninterested observer". The resultant, unstated, actions to be taken are obvious; The message is starting to sink in.

I started paying attention to the issue of European and American demographic decline and the effects of immigration on culture over 20 years ago. The warning signs were obvious if you were paying attention and had a modicum of historical knowledge, along with a value system to put it into cultural context. Mark Steyn and others were pointing toward the gathering clouds at least a couple decades ago.

And yet Western Civilization marched on toward the cliff, oblivious, indoctrinating our children to drink the blue Koolaid and abandon the very value system that allowed our advanced society to emerge in the first place. For all our technological advancements, humans are morons of the first order.

And now we are entering a new dark age. That's not hyperbole. Technological advances doth not a civilization make. It might create the illusion of civilization, but without the moral underpinnings of a society that seeks truth above all, real advances are impossible. The philosophies of humanism, relativism, postmodernism, deconstruction, and the rest, are but lies foisted upon lies that twist the human psyche into a nihilistic mush.

Ladies and Gentlemen, we are in the nascent stages of WWIII. And with it, has come a descent from progress not seen in 1000 years.

@13Same with my kin and close friends. Also find myself commenting more often something dispassionate like: "well, I can wish for the outcome to be different this time, but given the history the odds are stacked against it." I'm finding a dispassionate approach, marbled with enough rhetoric (gleaned from this site and SJWAL) can be thought-provoking for others, even uplifting, in this noisy, high-carb zeitgeist of snark and zingers. History is the casino they're betting against, and ultimately the house wins.

PA - good catch. As someone who works with veterans directly, I can testify to the fact that Google has directly inverted statistical reality. God forbid the Narrative not be as ubiquitous as it is dishonest.

We are entering a period in Western Civilization that will be known as "The Disenlightenment" if there is anyone left to record it.

Reading Lind's book on 4g warfare "On War" he says "Once Again, as before 1648, many different entities, not states, are fighting war. They use many different means including terrorism and immigration, not just formal armies".

People give Hammurabi credit for writing down laws for almost the first time. With 282 written laws, a huge kingdom was governed. That kingdom was first conquered, then governed.

If you go to the history of laws, often a city or state defined itself as the people who knew the only really good laws, or the laws of that city. If you came from outside you could be in big trouble because they were going to enforce their laws on you. You couldn't possibly be considered a tribe member, or citizen of a city or state if you did not understand and carefully live the usually unwritten law.

Unfortunately we are seeing a lot of refugees who know only their local version of Sharia law moving into western countries. And guess which law they think is superior until the first generation has passed away and the third generation is assimilated? Yep, the old law.

@23It's not a matter of magic dirt, but rather magic air. Successive generations of immigrants suck in larger and larger gulps at a time and see the value in a liberal representative democracy.What the American Experience has proved is that immigrants always embrace the ideals first spelled out during the founding given time.

That word, 'always'. You use it, but I don't think you know what it means. Where will the magic air come from that will make the 59 million hispanics who have flooded into our country over the last 15 years assimilate? Oh, right, there isn't any. They make a majority in many places and will soon be able to create Mexico Norte for themselves.Honestly, how's the Cuckservative Flav-r-ade, you stupid ass?

@19 DadSo how do you hasten that acceptance of the new law? Anyone? . Kick their useless asses out?

@23 Art's gotta be doing a bit. How would someone who truly believed all that ever find his way to this blog and not faint from all the badthink before he could post a comment? He has to be doing a spoof of an open borders shill. Come on, using "American Experience" unironically? Well done, Art. After a setup like that, I look forward to the punch line.

@23 Art Blake:It's not a matter of magic dirt, but rather magic air. Successive generations of immigrants suck in larger and larger gulps at a time and see the value in a liberal representative democracy.What the American Experience has proved is that immigrants always embrace the ideals first spelled out during the founding given time.How does that work for blacks? The vast majority can trace their ancestry in the Western hemisphere to between the 17th and 19th Centuries. How many today give a damn about ''the rights of Englishmen'' or even the concept ''don't kill or at least attempt to do so just because you are capable of it''?Damn few I'd say.

Chiva / Art BlakeFrom where did those Catholics come?How about, where did they go? My family gave up on Catholicism and its various European backgrounds and replaced them with nothing beyond "go to college, get a job, buy a house."I don't know how common that is, but assuming every person who isn't down with honor killings has integrated into America and "embrace(d) the ideals first spelled out during the founding" is a terrible assumption to make.

Besides, even if you accept the open-borders shills' argument that those Catholics eventually assimilated completely, what did that take? The states borrowed a common, authoritarian, top-down education system from the Prussians -- a system we're still suffering from -- partly to assimilate Catholic kids. (Keep in mind that at that time, and up until Vatican II, the Church was still pro-monarchy and anti-"religious liberty," positions Americans weren't real comfortable with.) There were decades of anti-Catholic bigotry in hiring practices and social treatment (again, accepting the pro-immigrant myth here). They didn't all just spontaneously decide to do everything they could to fit in.

What are the chances we could enact any sort of hard-core assimilate-or-bust program today? Would the open-borders shills even support such a concept? Of course not. When they're not busy lying about past immigrants, they're telling us how superior the new ones and their culture are to us and ours. So they're not going to let us assimilate them, even if we could -- they won't even let us teach them English.

It's such a bait-and-switch: you should let immigrants in because they assimilated in the past (even when they didn't), but don't you dare try to assimilate them. Liars.

"No, it most certainly wasn't. They weren't solely to blame, but they were definitely a part of moving America away from the Constitution."

Today, American catholics are in the forefront of the religious liberty movement and have been strong allies of the more conservative protestant movements for religious liberty. It's hard to argue that Catholics didn't integrate into the American political culture.

As for "moving away from the constitution", I'd consider that but I don't know specifically what you are referring to.

"It just looks like a more wordy version of "you're on the wrong side of history" to me."

No...it's a more wordy version of you are on the wrong side of reality. Every poll and survey of latinos shows that second, third, and 4th generation latinos vote more conservatively, have more conservative views of immigration and participate more thoroughly in the democratic institutions be it voting or local community organizations. In other words, they embrace traditional American political and cultural ideals the further away they are from their ancestors' arrival in this country...exactly how past catholic and other immigrant groups have.

>>Every poll and survey of latinos shows that second, third, and 4th generation latinos vote more conservatively, have more conservative views of immigration

You are making this up. Latinos vote 60-70% Democrat, and the Democratic party today is a hard left party. There is no evidence that Latinos or Asians, for that matter, are migrating to conservative parties. To a great extent Latinos and Asians reject American founding ideals. They are here, literally, just for the money.

Every poll and survey of latinos shows that second, third, and 4th generation latinos vote more conservatively, have more conservative views of immigration and participate more thoroughly in the democratic institutions be it voting or local community organizations.

More conservative than what? Than their parents and grandparents? That means little when they're still miles to the left of descendants of Revolutionaries.

Today, American catholics are in the forefront of the religious liberty movement and have been strong allies of the more conservative protestant movements for religious liberty. It's hard to argue that Catholics didn't integrate into the American political culture.

They vote 50% for the pro-abortion candidate too. Hey, how about that. So you're right, to the extent that they've become non-Catholic, while also becoming more liberal and less invested in the ideals America was founded on. And you think this is a selling point for your argument? (Hint: "religious liberty," as it's now being defined by modernist bishops and others, is not what the Founders meant by "freedom of religion.")

I miss the days of netiquette, when it was generally understood that you should lurk in a forum for at least a couple weeks before posting. If you'd done that, Art, you'd have known better than to peddle the standard pro-immigration boilerplate here. Stop insulting us.

"On the issue of gay marriage, Hispanics ages 30-44 are 48% more likely to support gay marriage policies compared to the national average, closely followed by ages 18-29 (43%). Hispanics ages 45-59 represent the largest age group to oppose gay marriage, although these respondents are still 12% less likely to oppose such policies compared to the national average."

Art BlakeNo...it's a more wordy version of you are on the wrong side of reality.Except: It reminds me of the Nativism...The current nativist movement... reminds me of how gay rights to marriage were supposedly another step from women's rights and black rights. (The slippery slope isn't real, but progress is inevitable.)But I'll do the points as I see them

1) That Catholics were "integrated" many generations later can be attributed to America being very different. John F. Kennedy being Catholic was controversial in the 60's and he remains the only Catholic president. I don't know that the Nativists would consider this them being proved thoroughly false.

2) as Mistaben just said, Latino's voting more conservative relative to what? If I play an early 90's Simpsons episode for a teenager today, they'd think it was Christian propaganda. Chris Hitchens was a Leftist in the 90's and Neo-conservative in the 2000's. If we take a modern person who claims to be a native of the American colonies that is a conservative, like Ann Coulter, does she resemble the mainstream or does she even get on Fox News these days?

3) have more conservative views of immigration and participate more thoroughly in the democratic institutions be it voting or local community organizations.Didn't California just decide a driver's license let you vote, so that non-citizens can vote in California?

We really did not inherit a stable heritage from the Anglos. The British isles have been invaded by the Celts, the Romans, the Saxons, the Danes, and finally by the Frenchy Danes (Normans) 1066. If memory serves, one of these French guys died in a mishap with a hot poker up his anus (query: does Obama have Norman blood?) Then the English tired of the Frenchy Danes, chopped one of their heads off, ran off the headless guy's grandson, and invited in a bunch of crazy (sometimes literally so) Germans to rule over them. English history reads more like a soap opera than the history of a sedate constitutional Monarchy. Right in line with current events.

@42You missed when they invited William and Mary in... from the Netherlands.

Another view could be that the many post-Roman waves were made up of many small bands at various points, which lead to a greater voice for the followers (when your taking over a large section of foreign land from hostile natives you better listen to your followers down to what might be referred to as a "yeoman" level [yes, it isn't congruent historically but it does contain a bit of the spirit of things] as you need their willing support. There were major leaders (Hengist and Horsa, Danish kings even) but there were also many smaller groups which is part of the reason Anglo-Saxon England was internally divided for much of its history. Alfred the Great wasn't even leader of all of the Anglo-Saxons. The Normans, being a minority in the land, also ended up having to make concessions to some of the native ruling class and their own contentious vassals (the Magna Carta for instance)

Research the political attitudes and proclivities of 3rd and 4th generation Hispanics vs. 1st and 2nd generation Hispanics.

"Hint: "religious liberty," as it's now being defined by modernist bishops and others, is not what the Founders meant by "freedom of religion.""

I think it's only an academic exercise to give a lot of consideration to what the founding generation believed vis a vis the world as it exists today. One thing that is guaranteed is that on a whole host of issues you'll find that the vast majority of Americans of white, protestant, anglo background would would be opposed to many of the Founders' views.

Slavery is only the most obvious example. Forms of punishment would be another example. Religious liberty and the franchise would be two other examples. When I see someone bemoan the fact that our current system of government and current set of social/political/cultural values have strayed from those of the Founders I assume the person concerned with this isn't a serious person.

"You are making this up. Latinos vote 60-70% Democrat, and the Democratic party today is a hard left party. There is no evidence that Latinos or Asians, for that matter, are migrating to conservative parties. To a great extent Latinos and Asians reject American founding ideals. They are here, literally, just for the money. "

"Research the political attitudes and proclivities of 3rd and 4th generation Hispanics vs. 1st and 2nd generation Hispanics."

How about my in-laws in small town (these days) Saginaw, Michigan? Third generation, cheering on the rising Hispanic population in California without understanding that once the tipping-point is reached with over half being Spanish speakers natively - not English - the country is doomed. There has never been a successful country that was split linguistically - empires for a time, but no countries. Try and play the Canada card and some of the Dread Ilk from that area will set you straight on the damage it has done liberty there. I'd lay good odds that many of them wish that Quebec would leave the Dominion.

Looking at it Veterans are at least 50% female and black/brown have tons more ribbons/awards than the white guy, with whites clearly in the minority. I guess black females get bronze stars just for showing up on time.

And guess which law they think is superior until the first generation has passed away and the third generation is assimilated?

At a free veterans day lunch I told people that the US has not fought on the side of western civilization in my lifetime, and that Clinton attacking the Serbs when they tried to kick out illegal alien moslems enabled the current moslem invasion of civilization.

The current nativist movement is being proved false as 2nd, 3rd and 4th generation hispanics quite capably become Americans

We received the right side of the bell curve from Cuba, along with Spain is the source of the majority of the good news from Hispanics. Right now birth documents have over a dozen flavors of Hispanic to list all that apply because hidalgo Hispanics are doing so well they pull up the mestizo numbers out of victimhood.

Art,It's not true and you fucking know it. You like Mexicans because they theoretically have alot in common with your Irish or Italian great-grandparents. Let me tell you, punk, they don't. Do you know why the Irish assimilated? No, not magical air. Nor indeed, magical dirt. They Irish in American became solid middle-class citizens because the Irish priests in America went on a literal Crusade against prostitution, adultery, child molestation, gambling, and drunkenness amongst the immigrant Irish. Where are the Mexican priests that will reform the Mexican immigrants? All I see among Mexican priests are fat, lazy, useless grievance mongers and faggots.We're not "know-nothings" we're "know-a-lot-better-than-to-believe-propagandas". Many of us are actual Catholics, unlike the majority of the Mexican filth flooding the border.

I wasted two minutes of my life reading Art's link. Naturally, it doesn't support his lies, though the author's trying to sell the same lie he is. It cherry-picks an oddball issue I've never even heard of before -- a Democratic plan to provide free lawyers to immigrants (whether they're for illegals trying to stay or applicants trying to get in, it doesn't say, but I'd assume the former or both. Honestly, I'm surprised they don't already do that).

According to one poll, 44% of second-generation Latinos don't support the plan, compared to 57% of first-generation who do. The author then makes a huge leap to the notion that this means they're potential Republican voters, which is ridiculous. Obviously some of them just don't want more competition for the goodies they've already gotten. We who are paying attention already knew that. He picks a couple other stats that show the same thing: once people have their citizenship, they're more amenable to closing the door on others -- though I doubt that extends to chain migration that would keep their own families out.

That doesn't mean, as Art claims, that they're becoming more "conservative" in any way. It just means they're selfish. It's the same old trap for conservatives: Look, they're with you on this one issue! Well, 44% of them are, but isn't that a biiiiig number? Don't look at the other issues where they hate you! Just focus on this one; it's a winner, we promise!

@51 Switzerland as a confederation with many internal natural borders is an exception. Perhaps I am incorrect, but "the country" maters much less to the normal Swiss than the canton. Not an option that can play out writ large.

Any healthcare worker could call Art out on his bullshit. What do we see?

1st generation: came here for the welfare. Have an anchor baby, and they get loads of it.

2nd generation: Freeloaders just like the 1st generation. Keeping with the good ol' traditions of their parents! Only this generation was usually left to run wild because their parents just left it to the public education system to raise them. Gang members, teenage pregnancies abound. Intact families are a thing of the past. In other words, even worse. 3rd generation: the mucked up follow ups from the dysfunctional 2nd generation. Raised by ignorant single welfare moms and the public education system, still on welfare because hey, thats just what you do!

You missed when they invited William and Mary in... from the Netherlands. I believe William invited himself in with the help of the Dutch Army and Navy and a few protestant Quislings. The Glorious Revolution was a Dutch Invasion.

@36 Art Blake:>>Every poll and survey of latinos shows that second, third, and 4th generation latinos vote more conservatively, have more conservative views of immigration

Oh please, while I can't really speak for the rest of the US in Florida that is simply untrue.The ''staunch Republican'' Cubans who came in the late 50's early 60's are aging and dying out. Their children/grandchildren? Most move left/Democrat, very few retain the ''Cuban missile crisis'' politics of that era. Cubans that came post-JFK are as left as Mexicans or the Puerto Ricans that FL has quite a few of - especially in Central FL which was enough to tip FL into the Obama column both times.And wherever Puerto Ricans are they are solid Democrat, reliably %70-80 overall.

@44 Sir Hamster:Odd. Google's not showing me one. They often skipped recognizing the patriotic holidays in past years.Not a problem, Stuff Black People Don't Like reposted it with the comment Spot the White Male in Google's Veterans Day 2015 DoodleForget 'Where's Waldo'?

Where's the White male?BTW, the airman in the back row does look like a White man, the woman to his right may or may not be Asian - it's open to interpretation.

All of you have to realize that a Nation is not a land, or a set of laws, or even a language, it is always a people. When Rome was full of Romans and their Legions were manned by Romans, they were invincible. No matter how many battles they lost, another Legion took their place. Even Hannibal, one of the greatest Generals in Human History, could defeat the Romans.However, when Rome let in Barbarians who cared nothing for Rome or the Republic or even the Empire, but just came for the Bread and Circuses, it was the end. When they outnumbered the Romans, they voted for nothing but Bread and Circuses. The Romans stopped joining the Legions because Rome was no longer Roman, and the Legions became Barbarian mercenary armies that didn't fight for Rome, and joined in the looting with the other barbarians. What no army or general could do, corruption of the blood and soil accomplished. Rome fell and became a deserted ruin.That Google ad is the turning point. The White man must now see they have no one in the Government to represent them anymore. Google would not dare such a cheap affront if they were expecting rebuke from any authorities. America is you White man.Join the Mobile Infantry. There are no non-White Americans. The United States is a land of strangers from a strange land. Homosexuals, Satanists, Atheists, and Aliens have infested it like an army of BUGS. We Starship Troopers are the future. They have none. We will leave the Earth and they will join their Mother Gaia under the ground. They have the Undiscovered Country and we have the Earth, the Sun, the Moon and the Stars...

The quote from Aristotle is a beaut.........difference of races which do not at once acquire a common spirit"

this really is the killing fields stuffing in the turkey. Islam and its prophet says there is no "Holy Spirit". ie Art's religious freedom meme is a 100 percent cognitive dissonance train wreck

there's a difference between funding one's enemies and tolerating a difference of opinion about how many angels can dance on the point of a needle.

As for a flag. Jesus. It's like this. One takes a wife to the exclusion of all others. Children are the number one beneficiaries of that deal. A safe home. A safe college are the chief beneficiaries of that deal. A home is a nation in microcosm. Shit on every other platitude.

This is probably the primary problem with the philosophy espoused on this blog. You can't deny basic realities and basic facts and expect more than a few misfits to get on board.

But you do articulate your philosophy well here, that I'll give you. The problem is that the better you articulate it the better you are understood.

The idea that Catholics, Hispanics, Blacks and any other non anglo-saxon can't be a good American is all over this blog. But what it amounts to is non some sort of ideological or philosophical indictment of these groups, but a fundamental misunderstanding of history and reality.

Mencius has some interesting stuff somewhere (too lazy to dig for it now) about how Latin America had 250 years of peace and prosperity under Spanish rule (i.e. c. 1550-c. 1800). Then we inspired them to tear it all down, and it's been a dump ever since (except for a few good years in Chile under Pinochet). Basically the same story as France, only slightly less dramatic and much less well known.

The only war of ours I can think of that might be at least neutral would be the Mexican-American war--there's nothing wrong with a good old-fashioned war for territory, though I don't know enough about it to be confident that's what it was really about.

How about my in-laws in small town (these days) Saginaw, Michigan? Third generation, cheering on the rising Hispanic population in California without understanding that once the tipping-point is reached with over half being Spanish speakers natively - not English - the country is doomed.

Holy crap, is that the situation in Sagnasty these days?! I had no idea.

It is time for drastic measures. "Kill it with fire" seems too lax.

The United States is a land of strangers from a strange land. Homosexuals, Satanists, Atheists, and Aliens have infested it like an army of BUGS.

Most of your atheists are home-grown. Some of them are outgrowths of the SJW contingent of so-called Christianity. Mine's not from SJW-ness. I don't have the time to dig back to find out where my atheism came from, but it certainly came from a branch of Christi-insanity and nothing else.

The White man must now see they have no one in the Government to represent them anymore. Google would not dare such a cheap affront if they were expecting rebuke from any authorities.

The White man must recognize that Google (and all its employees and owners) is The Enemy.

There are no non-White Americans.

Truth.

Homosexuals, Satanists, Atheists, and Aliens have infested it

Wrong. Atheists have not bought into the -genderist, -religionist, and other -ist fallacies. They see anti-Whiteism for what it is. You alienate them at your own peril. I am of them. Do not confuse them with lefftsts; they are not the same.

I did my damnedest to edit the previous, but I could not get back to a link that would let me change the text. There were things I wanted to change, but I was effectively forbidden; do not blame me for what came through.

Mr Rational. To alienate logic like your own one would have to be anti logical wouldn't one? Alien means without a claim. You, of course, base your world views on solid science, like, Bertrand Russell and Einstein. Only their's wasn't. Your "atheism" is your "religion" and you preach no differently from any Imam. Pure rationalism is inseparable from scientology/ materialism/ communism or any other ism. It's your preferred set of axioms. The perfectly arbitrary unquestionable choices that you wish to impose on simply everyone. lots of Christian love and all.

@65 To alienate logic like your own one would have to be anti logical wouldn't one? Alien means without a claim.

"Without a claim" describes the statement "The United States is a land of strangers from a strange land. Atheists... have infested it" in @54. Muslims are imported; atheists (part of the exploding fraction of "Nones") are mostly people who realize "this stuff Just Don't Make Sense". We're home-grown. We grew up in your neighborhoods and were even raised in your churches. I was.

"Nones" now account for 1/5 of the US population, on the order of 60 million. They're leaving your crazy churches (and probably accounting for the collapse of the SJW-infested ones). Many are functionally atheist, even if they wouldn't agree with the label. Many more would probably fit the definition of deist. They are the reason the RCC has to import mestizos to keep its attendance up and coffers filled.

Your "atheism" is your "religion" and you preach no differently from any Imam.

Ah, yes, to insist that facts matter and that anything which can be determined by examination of evidence ought to be, rather than appealing to a tortured interpretation of an ancient text whose colloquialisms and idioms have been lost to time... that is SUCH a radical position, isn't it? One that I'd have to be a fucking idiot to hold to, right?

You're coming across as shrill as the apologists for Black crime and dysfunction. The Dogma is as sacred as their Narrative. You need to put a sign over your door: "Abandon Every Shred Of Reason, All Ye Who Enter Here."

Post a Comment

Rules of the blogPlease do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.